Profiles of epistemological beliefs, knowledge about explanation norms, and explanation skills: changes after an intervention

In this study, we exploratively investigate the relation between students' epistemological beliefs and their declarative knowledge about scientific explanations and their practical skills to explain psychological phenomena drawing on scientific theories before and after a training intervention using a person-centered approach. We theoretically derive profiles of epistemological beliefs that should be beneficial for constructing scientific explanations. We those having higher explanation skills show a profile of epistemological beliefs that is beneficial for explanations skills. Using a latent profile transition analysis and a sample with N = 108 students, we explore which profiles of epistemological beliefs, declarative knowledge about explanations, and explanation skills empirically emerge before and after an intervention that aimed and fostering students' skills to construct scientific explanations. Before the intervention, two profiles emerged that differed in epistemological beliefs and explanation skills, but both did not in declarative knowledge about explanation. The intervention, in general, yielded a gain in declarative knowledge about explanations and explanation skills. After the intervention, again, two profiles emerged. However, these profiles did not differ in their epistemological beliefs but only in declarative knowledge about explanations and explanation skills. Thus, the intervention seems to level out the effects of epistemological beliefs. Additionally, the pattern of change in epistemological beliefs is consistent with theoretical expectations about which epistemological beliefs are beneficial for explanations. We discuss the results and their implications, as well as their limitations. Finally, we provide an outlook of using the person-oriented approach and this study's type of intervention in the research on changing epistemological beliefs.

Social-Scientific Research Competency

Abstract. Although the development of research competency is an important goal of higher education in social sciences, instruments to measure this outcome often depend on the students’ self-ratings. To provide empirical evidence for the utility of a newly developed instrument for the objective measurement of social-scientific research competency, two validation studies across two independent samples were conducted. Study 1 ( n = 675) provided evidence for unidimensionality, expected differences in test scores between differently advanced groups of students as well as incremental validities over and above self-perceived research self-efficacy. In Study 2 ( n = 82) it was demonstrated that the competency measured indeed is social-scientific and relations to facets of fluid and crystallized intelligence were analyzed. Overall, the results indicate that the test scores reflected a trainable, social-scientific, knowledge-related construct relevant to research performance. These are promising results for the application of the instrument in the evaluation of research education courses in higher education.

Learning Scientific Explanations by Means of Worked Examples – Promoting Psychology Students’ Explanation Competence

The aim of this study is to investigate whether worked examples are effective in fostering psychology students’ explanation competence. Explanation competence is a context-specific cognitive disposition that enables a person to construct a causal model of an observable psychological phenomenon by drawing on psychological theories. We set up a training intervention using worked examples to demonstrate how the observed psychological phenomenon (e.g., cognitive dissonance) is represented in an explanation. Instructional support was implemented using a fading procedure. We investigated the effects of worked examples on explanation competence using a sample of psychology students ( n = 46) from a German university. In an experimental between-group pre- and post-tests design, the participants in the experimental condition received the training intervention, whereas the participants in a control condition did not receive the intervention. The experimental and control groups did not differ in their explanation competence before the training intervention. Participants in the experimental condition had a significant higher explanation competence after the training intervention than the participants in the control condition. Thus, our results indicate that worked examples effectively foster psychology students’ explanation competence. Considerations on how the results could be implemented in actual teaching settings are provided.